So as I have mentioned in a previous post, I took the Learning class, in the spring of 2012 (northern hemisphere, lol). I reviewed the general foundations of Classical (a.k.a. Pavlovian) condition and Operant Conditions. I still have access to my course’s Syllabus. The teacher was one of a kind, and he was very open to ideas as a good scientist should be. The first day of class was about how one error we make is to use a word or definition to describe something and really say nothing at all. It is like a circular argument (if you are familiar with that).
He is angry, because he is aggressive. How do you know he is aggressive? He was angry. And how do you know he was angry? He hit the table, his eyes went wide, his nostrils flared, his voiced raised.
So, this use of Layman’s words or vocabulary, e.g. aggressive, could have no value. This is a problem, when you use words of no value (in any field im sure). I also illustrated in the above dialog how anger can be defined in various ways, and often it is defined as an observable behavior, e.g. hitting, widening of eyes, flaring nostrils etc… So if you see in the above example how the following holds true:
Anger ---------> Behavior
Aggressive -------> Behavior
Both Anger and Aggressive are referring to the same observable behavior. It could be the case, however, that perhaps someone sees the behavior says: “this is anger”, and then say that “anger must mean he was aggressive”. Though this last statement says nothing at all, right? The only truly informative statement would be, “he hit the table” or “I believe that hitting the table means he is angry.” The statement “I believe…” can never be true or false, however the statement “he hit the table” can be true or false, in that it did or did not happen that he hit the table. All thoughts, opinions, beliefs, imaginations, can never be true. Statements such as “ I think…” I believe…” “I imagine…” are making a claim about reality, and the Claim can be assessed for reality or truthfulness. (I studied philosophy and logic). All of the Analytical branch of Academics go hand in hand. Analytical philosophy and Science have very similar methods in assessing reality. The main difference is that Science actually tests the reality using objective measurements. Objective is defined as anyone else can take the same measurements or observe the same thing. That it is not limited to only one subject’s (subjective) point of view (Philosophy employs more subjective point of view without verifying with objective measures). Also, what is interesting is that truthfulness of claims depends a great deal on the specificity of the claim. For example, all or every Emerald is green. This statement can be disproved with finding one emerald that is not green, e.g. blue, red. Finding several green emeralds, however can never prove this statement, because there could always be a red or blue emerald, as far as you know. The other common statement is that some emeralds are green. This requires only finding one emerald to prove that at least some emeralds are green. Finding a blue or red emerald does not disprove the statement, because there could always be a green emerald out there. The fact of the matter is, that if you assess your evidence, what you know: there are so many emeralds or things… realize that this is all you know and there could be things you do not know and have not observed. A scientist that will uncover the truth of reality will always test, retest and further find evidence, regardless of his views, opinions or beliefs. The role of money may be perhaps the only reason why science currently fails. The principle of objectivity is there, however the personality of the scientist have been fueled my money as such they are given more power, which leads to inequality, and fuels a belief that some (people/beings) are better than others. Take money out of the picture and you take away fear and insecurity. If you give money to all equally, true science will immediately emerge. This has been my experience both what I have seen in others and in myself. One fear that I have uncovered personally is the fear to go against the grain, to make startling claims I cannot back up, to fear being courageous, to fear saying what I really think, which holding a belief can be cool if you see its only a belief and requires testing.
I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to fear failing, and fear having the willingness to risk myself and lose myself through daring myself to present myself for who I am currently, and challenge myself, thus leading to an investigation that will uncover the truth of myself, and who I really am, and even who others are as myself.
I forgive myself as humanity to divide itself so that some parts are better and seen as more important than others, without realizing how seeing is a belief, opinion, or thought and so requires testing to assess the reality, and to as well define what importance is.
I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to use importance as an excuse to blame humanity, blame plants, blame animals, and to not take responsibility for the destruction and vengeance that we have accepted and allowed to be connected to the definition of the word importance.
I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to not redefine importance to non-energetic terms, that important means I must do more, because I can do more, and to be important means using my power to assist and support all, because I am one part of all, and equally a part.
I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to not realize and understand how belief, opinion, and thought only requires a testing for reality, that there is Nothing inherently wrong with beliefs, opinions, and thoughts, and that they are equal to themselves, that they are only sentence structures that demonstrate a person is making a statement, and this statement can either be true or false as it refers to reality.
I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to miss Reality within all of this thinking, and worrying, and fear I have experienced my Whole life.
I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to miss a simplicity that I have known perhaps only in childhood, that requires myself to live again as an active participant as simplicity.
I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to “give up” (you never really give it up, it is always here) the basic truths that I have kept close to my heart, so to speak, of who we are, what we are capable of (everything) and what will make us actually happy, instead of this fake happiness that only lasts so long, and also destroys everything.
I commit myself to find myself by risking myself in writing and introspection, and speaking.
I commit myself to stick with the core truths I have uncovered and continue testing them and using them and updating them according to the evidence I receive.
I commit myself to continue washing away all fears and doubts and see how in the past I have stood up from fears through direct participation and breathing.
I realize that happiness and positive feelings will require immense forgiveness, and specificity, equal to the level of forgiveness that is applied for others patterns that are stopped such as fears, and how at the core of each feeling is an emotion, which I notice included sadness in the past, whenever happiness was involved and one technique I used to uncover this was pretending a situation changed such that I was previously happy though now sad, revealing how the mental environment (the mental box) determines the state of the person, and how this is deceptively structured, and no feeling or emotion is really honestly the person himself being here with you and with this reality. Time to step out of the box and into these two feet.